It’s official! Trump pulls out of The #ParisAgreement on Climate

President Trump just announced that the U.S. will “withdraw” out of the Paris Climate Accord. But “begin negotiations to re-enter”.

Trump said:

“We will cease honoring all non-binding agreements”, and “will stop contributing to the green climate fund”.

“I can not in good conscience support a deal that harms the United States”.

“The bottom line is that the Paris Accord is very unfair to the United States”.

“This agreement is less about climate and more about other countries getting a financial advantage over the United States”.

“The agreement is a massive redistribution of United States wealth to other countries.”

“Fourteen days of carbon emissions alone would totally wipe out the U.S. contribution to reduction by 2030”

“Compliance with the terms of the Paris accord… could cost America as much as 2.7 million lost jobs by 2025.”

“India makes its participation contingent on receiving billions and billions and billions of dollars in foreign aid.”

“We need all forms of available American energy or our country will be at grave risk of brown-outs and black-outs.”

“Withdrawing is in economic interest and won’t matter much to the climate.”

“We will be environmentally friendly, but we’re not going to put our businesses out of work… We’re going to grow rapidly.”

“No responsible leader can put the workers and the people of their country at this debilitating and tremendous disadvantage.”

“The same nations asking us to stay in the agreement are the countries that have collectively cost America trillions.”

“My job as President is to do everything within my power to give America a level playing field.”

“The same nations asking us to stay in the agreement are the countries that have collectively cost America trillions.”

“I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris.”

“Foreign leaders in Europe, Asia, & across the world should not have more to say w/ respect to the US economy than our own citizens.”

“Our withdrawal from the agreement represents a reassertion of America’s sovereignty.”

“It is time to exit the Paris Accord and time to pursue a new deal which protects the environment, our companies, our citizens.”

Scott Pruitt: “America finally has a leader who answers only to the people.” “This is an historic restoration of American economic independence.”

The Paris Accord is a BAD deal for Americans, and the President’s action today is keeping his campaign promise to put American workers first. The Accord was negotiated poorly by the Obama Administration and signed out of desperation. It frontloads costs on the American people to the detriment of our economy and job growth while extracting meaningless commitments from the world’s top global emitters, like China. The U.S. is already leading the world in energy production and doesn’t need a bad deal that will harm American workers.

 

UNDERMINES U.S. Competitiveness and Jobs

  • According to a study by NERA Consulting, meeting the Obama Administration’s requirements in the Paris Accord would cost the U.S. economy nearly $3 trillion over the next several
  • By 2040, our economy would lose 6.5 million industrial sector jobs – including 3.1 million manufacturing sector jobs
    • It would effectively decapitate our coal industry, which now supplies about one-third of our electric power

The deal was negotiated BADLY, and extracts meaningless commitments from the world’s top polluters

  • The Obama-negotiated Accord imposes unrealistic targets on the U.S. for reducing our carbon emissions, while giving countries like China a free pass for years to
    • Under the Accord, China will actually increase emissions until 2030

The U.S. is ALREADY a Clean Energy and Oil & Gas Energy Leader; we can reduce our emissions and continue to produce American energy without the Paris Accord

  • America has already reduced its carbon-dioxide emissions
    • Since 2006, CO2 emissions have declined by 12 percent, and are expected to continue to
    • According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), the U.S. is the leader in oil & gas

The agreement funds a UN Climate Slush Fund underwritten by American taxpayers

  • President Obama committed $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund – which is about 30 percent of the initial funding – without authorization from Congress
  • With $20 trillion in debt, the U.S. taxpayers should not be paying to subsidize other countries’ energy

The deal also accomplishes LITTLE for the climate

  • According to researchers at MIT, if all member nations met their obligations, the impact on the climate would be The impacts have been estimated to be likely to reduce global temperature rise by less than .2 degrees Celsius in 2100.

 

Advertisements

487 thoughts on “It’s official! Trump pulls out of The #ParisAgreement on Climate

    • Hallelujah to the power ‘n’ !!!!
      Let’s get back to sanity and providing the cheapest possible power to the greatest number of people SUBSIDY-FREE!

      • Ending wind and solar subsidies in Congress will be a tough sell.

        But if Trump’s approval numbers turn up, he could bring heat to bear.

        Here’s hoping.

      • A step in the right direction but not the right step. He should have given 12mo notice on UNFCCC, not a weak “withdrawl” statement. As I commented a few days ago his stance at G7 looked more like someone trying to renegotiate , not someone with the intention to pull out.

        There is nothing to renegotiate since the fundamental basis of dangerous warming is only found in flawed models. CO2 is not “pollution”.

        The great deal maker apparently thinks he can use this a bargaining chip against something else, which implies he will go along with it to some degree.

        All the Hurahs here may be rather jumping the gun.

      • Mr Trump seems to have decided that pulling out on economic concerns would be something not so easy to dispute. He left a door open for them to negotiate and it seems from reports that they slammed it shut.
        This leaves the President able to say with outraged virtue that they broke it off. A skillful manoeuvre from a professional.

      • Trump believed the human body was like a battery, with a finite amount of energy, which exercise only depleted. Really????? Google the statement. These are ramblings of a bemused madman, and you guys think he’s a genius!!!!

      • Wow!! You believe you have a made up friend in the sky but deny science. Good luck with that!!!

      • Jews and Christians say Hallelujah when things appear to be going right for once, I expect Moslems say something similar. It appears that you equate belief in God with inability to understand science, can you tell us why? Don’t give us the standard reasons advanced by Marx, He was rebelling against his strict Orthodox Jewish family and so was Trotsky. They didn’t study science either just German philosophy.

    • Congratulations Anthony and all the REAL SCIENTISTS who opine here that have made today’s announcement a success.

    • Trump deserves credit for this. So does Anthony. Thousands of people got their first critical look at the AGW scam at this site.

      • I’ll second that comment Chris. I was a sceptic with a hunch before I started reading WUWT a few years back. The site has put real meat on the bones. Now I have no doubts whatsoever where the truth lies. A truly great achievement Anthony! I just wish we could find a way of raising the debate to government and media level in the UK where pure ignorance still reigns barely challenged.

    • Reprise from April 2017:

      https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/04/18/white-house-cancels-meeting-on-considering-paris-climate-accord-action/#comment-2479880

      To Donald, Ivanka, Jared and Rex:

      Donald was correct – time to dump the Paris Climate nonsense!
      _________________

      COLE’S NOTES FOR all the TRUMPs and Rex Tillerson – from 2015:

      https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/06/13/presentation-of-evidence-suggesting-temperature-drives-atmospheric-co2-more-than-co2-drives-temperature/

      Observations and Conclusions:

      1. Temperature, among other factors, drives atmospheric CO2 much more than CO2 drives temperature. The rate of change dCO2/dt is closely correlated with temperature and thus atmospheric CO2 LAGS temperature by ~9 months in the modern data record

      2. CO2 also lags temperature by ~~800 years in the ice core record, on a longer time scale.

      3. Atmospheric CO2 lags temperature at all measured time scales.

      4. CO2 is the feedstock for carbon-based life on Earth, and Earth’s atmosphere and oceans are clearly CO2-deficient. CO2 abatement and sequestration schemes are nonsense.

      5. Based on the evidence, Earth’s climate is insensitive to increased atmospheric CO2 – there is no global warming crisis.

      6. Recent global warming was natural and irregularly cyclical – the next climate phase following the ~20 year pause will probably be global cooling, starting by ~2020 or sooner.

      7. Adaptation is clearly the best approach to deal with the moderate global warming and cooling experienced in recent centuries.

      8. Cool and cold weather kills many more people than warm or hot weather, even in warm climates. There are about 100,000 Excess Winter Deaths every year in the USA and about 10,000 in Canada.

      9. Green energy schemes have needlessly driven up energy costs, reduced electrical grid reliability and contributed to increased winter mortality, which especially targets the elderly and the poor.

      10. Cheap, abundant, reliable energy is the lifeblood of modern society. When politicians fool with energy systems, real people suffer and die. That is the tragic legacy of false global warming alarmism.

      Allan MacRae, P.Eng. Calgary, June 12, 2015

      Post Script for Rex Tillerson:

      Hi Rex,

      I have two engineering degrees, have worked in the energy business on six continents since 1984 and have made very significant contributions to the Canadian oilsands and the conventional oil and gas industry – this includes personally initiating the move to new royalty and tax terms and major cost reductions that revitalized the Alberta oilsands industry. Exxon was a 25% owner in three of our joint ventures.

      I suggest that few individuals have made more money for Exxon through their own initiatives than I have, and I did not even work for you. So please put on your engineering hat, study the above post, and forget about the alleged global warming crisis – it does not exist.

      Regards, Allan

      • Hi Allan, a good post. What concerns me is that so many influential people think that “the science is settled.” Science is never settled. So instead of having an intelligenjt and critical debate about the issues, climate science is treated more as a religion – or, more properly, a belief system not based on rational and demonstrable facts. President Trump has laid down a challenge – no bad thing in my view.
        We know that lawyers and judges were refugees from science at school. Perhaps many politicians and bureacrats were, too?

  1. Withdrawal is the correct decision, of course. But what an enormous waste of time and money to get to this point.
    /smh

    (I posted this on another topic by mistake: oops)

    • Trump had to get his ducks lined up. Those bullet points listing the costs of staying in the Paris Accord are necessary to support his position and take time to prepare. But they’re exactly what I expect of a businessman.

      • Why don’t the Democrats address the issues trump brought up, they are all just touchy feely and worry about what the rest of the world thinks……

  2. He just HAD to leave the door open, just a little. It’s like NAFTA. We will re-negotiate for more favorable terms. But what would be worth our while to enter into any sort of climate accord. Is China going to pay US to not emit CO2?

      • We can only hope. But I would have felt better if he just shut the door completely. Hasta lasagna, don’t get any on ya’.

      • I agree – never going to happen. The EU is going to be too butt-hurt over this to even think of renegotiating, because to do that would mean them saying that Trump was right, he could get a better deal. And they will never, ever, do that. So it’s over.

        After today, Trump could barbecue up a litter of cute little puppy’s and eat them all on live TV, and I’m STILL backing him!!!

      • I just wish he’d come out and totally discredited the AGW theory–call it the BS it is!

      • Agreed. It puts the ball into the Democrat’s court. If they can’t get a “fair” climate accord worked out, they fail. Good luck with that.

      • Lip service only? Maybe. Or maybe it’s a lot smarter than that: The Paris accord wasn’t aimed at cutting global warming, it was aimed at a new world order and at transferring wealth (as evidenced by a recent Merkel statement). So, what would a renegotiation look like?

    • I see it as just throwing a bone to the CAGW crowd to keep them occupied. China and India and will never enter into an agreement that will harm their economies (wow, what a weird idea….).

      • And I’ll bet any agreement Trump might agree to with China and India would not allow for unrestricted increases in their emissions. And I don’t think China and India would agree to such restrictions, so I don’t see any chance of a new agreement being made, just on that alone.

    • As others have said, this is a sop to Ivanka and to the “Consensus” believers.
      Note that DJT mentioned MANY times the fact that India and China receive reparations while continuing to build hundreds of plants and massively increasing their CO2 output.

      Trump said he is willing to will renegotiate a deal that is FAIR to the US relative to the other signees.
      Anyone anticipate that any “new” deal would include provisions where the US had to cut back immediately and allowed others to continue emissions?

    • I took it as a veiled challenge to the “believers” to prove whether they actually believe their own propaganda by making them put their money where their mouth is. If they truly think that the end of the world is at hand unless everyone reverts to a primitive lifestyle, then they certainly should be willing to do whatever is necessary, including dialing back their own economic development, to prevent it. Of course, they would never in a million years do that, but they’re only too happy to suck the U.S. dry if the liberal idiots would permit them.

      I think this may be the best strategy, even though I would certainly have loved to hear Trump crush the false underpinnings of the theory itself. We know that if you attack the “science”, the believers just throw up a convoluted technical-sounding smokescreen that fools many because it sounds authoritative. I think a better plan of attack is to hold the proponents to their own claims, and then spotlight the rank hypocrisy that inevitably results. If they truly believed that their every action would “destroy the planet” they would radically alter their own lifestyles, which they clearly have not. If the “97% consensus” were real, the so-called “climatologists” responsible for it would be moving to higher ground to avoid the coming flood, or would be living in a tent and eating grass and twigs to prevent it. That clear disconnect between their words and their actions is EXACTLY the type of argument that resonates with average people.

      It used to be easy to simply point to the failure of the latest of their short-term predictions of doom, but they finally wised up and moved the prediction goal posts beyond the lifetimes of everyone currently alive.

    • Mumbles,

      good point, but it’s much like Brexit. Trump has just thrown the rest of the world a scarp of meat and they will squabble over it like madmen whilst America gets it’s shit together.

      They will eventually come back, with a cobbled together deal, none of them actually agree on, and Trump will kick it into the long grass.

      Meanwhile America is then competing on a global scale again, and I damn well hope we Brits sit up, take notice and hang onto it’s coat tails.

      It’s a long time overdue that the UK supports the US again instead of an insular, economically stagnant EU, run by Germany (what an effing surprise)!

    • Haha! He is not leaving the door open. Do you think that that India and China (and other countries) want to do anything that costs them? — and that is what Trump will demand. By offering to renegotiate he puts them in the position of displaying their complete hypocrisy.

      Eugene WR Gallun

    • EU leaders issued a joint communique stating that there would be no renegotiation. Topic closed.

      • IMO Trump knew that would be the case.

        Much as I would have liked for him to have called BS on CACA scientifically, I trust his political instincts.

        Economic nationalism is the horse he rode in on, and he’s smart to stay in the saddle. Treating this as a bad trade deal was the way to go, IMO. It plays to his audience and puts Dumpocraps on the spot. They need to win back blue collar voters, but now can’t if they stand by the cuckoo CACA religion.

      • Funny, that. And the crocodile tears…
        Merkel’s government is putting on line 6 -un-mothballed- and 8 new coal fired plants -to keep the lights on and key German industries from de-locating Said in passing, with Peabody and the likes having come out of chapter 11 since DT was elected, supplying [N.B.] US coal until [mothballed] German mines start producing again.

    • He can set up a committee to review what we actually know about the atmosphere on this planet and
      he can also call in the climate scaremongers and ask them to give their reasons for their opinions to the committee which can then examine them for scientific proof…. This will be difficult to do and may take a long time, but he can point to the committee and say something is being done.
      What can they complain about ? Their concerns are being taken seriously aren’t they?
      .Acknowledgements to Sir Humphrey Appleby .. fictional though he may be.

      • Beliaik
        Much power to your elbow!
        I’m on my third bottle of French Red. Doin’ fine!

        Many smiles all round here.

        A pity that POTUS didn’t actually ask for a Red vs. Blue Public debate on CAGW/Climate slushiness (or whatever grandiloquent sleaze name current resonates through the kleptocrats’ mansions).

        Auto

      • Sipping a well aged celebratory bourbon here. Neat. Why send money to the frogs for champagne (except on New Years eve). Exceptions make the rule.

      • I heard about it at lunch in a bistro – they had a big screen tv showing news. Went and got a celebratory beer straight away.

        As we Aussies toast: “Chug-a-lug”

        Chug-a-lug to President Trump!

    • PJB – there’s cold champagne in my refrigerator – but not for long. Not gonna wait for the Sun to drop below the yardarm. POP!! Here’s to DJT, Lindzen, Soon, Singer, Happer, Dyson, Morano, Cruz, Lamar Smith, cwon14, Anthony, and all the rest of the team and the whole gang at WUWT – far too many to mention here.

      • Don’t forget Judith Curry!

        All these folks have shown true courage and character in the face of the most disgraceful smears and abuse from the CAGW clique.

    • I’ll raise a glass of Guinness later. There’s a place near my home that has it on tap. Yum!

  3. He kept his promise.
    This is what happens when a man is simply what he says he is, and does his best to live up to it.
    Leading by example.

    We’ve become so accustomed to the opposite, that we’ve begun to think it’s everybody. But ‘everybody’ does it’ is always the biggest cop out – an excuse to be no different yourself.
    But if it’s not you, it’s not everybody, is it?

    Cheers, everybody.

      • I can guarantee you Jeb Bush would never have done this, nor would Kasich, nor would McCain – the list goes on and on and on.

      • I agree most of the 17 would not have done this. of the few that would have, I think none could have done it as well as Trump. The EH* factor was worth the vote for him!

        *EH – Explodey Head.

      • Well, I think he should be 35% of they there already.
        And I live across the pond.

        Best POTUS since Ronnie Reagan?

        Looks that way – so far – from here.

        Auto

      • @Auto
        Second that on the Gipper. But let’s face it, even including Bush I and Bush II, the bar was barely off the ground.

      • “… the bar was barely off the ground.”
        the president that didn’t try for Limbo King!
        and he made it look so easy.
        heh- kuhn cats just got turpentined

    • That’s what I thought was earth-shattering: President Trump’s excoriating illumination of a transfer of wealth from despots that support the UN in their globalization at the expense of the G7, particularly the US.

    • It’s the first Trump speech, nay, any American presidential speech I have ever watched.

      What impressed me, above all, is that the guy talks our language.

      Which may be feint praise from an ignoramus like me, but he fulfilled a campaign promise, explained why, in clear, plain English, and sent out a message that he was working for America, no one else.

      I may live to regret saying this, but who wouldn’t want a boss like that?

      Many may call it a partisan speech, and I’ll 100% agree with that, and the last British politician to deliver partisan messages so powerful was Winston Churchill.

      Trump has just done what many great leaders have done in the past; fulfilled a promise and clearly explained why.

      AGW itself is a political, ideological, philosophical and scientific battleground for the planet. This is WW3, thankfully we have learned to wage it without ordnance.

      Win or lose, on either side, this should be the one great positive we take from all this.

      Talking is better than fighting.

  4. A great step in the right direction. We might be in the dark soon here in the people’s republic of green california, but at least we’ll have a country to which we can escape.

    • You’re more than welcome in Texas right now? We’re going to need you since some of your “countrymen” coming this way are flaming libs…

      • I’m thinking that after this announcement today, our Gov. Abbott might pull a Strangelove, and stand up saying “My President! I can walk!!!”

    • a_generalist
      June 1, 2017 at 12:47 pm

      You did not hear anything did you???!!!!…..you just have being given the power to end your nightmare in Cal……
      The extraordinary road block has just being lifted for you guys…..Sue your Government and your state, now….You can;t lose…is a 97% win versus 3%…….
      The odds already reversed in your favor..clearly.

      The main and only problem up to now was the road block….it has being just lifted for you by your good President.

      No any State govt.t in the USA territory has any valid defense anymore against the people in the matter of green policy and legislation…in any court of the land….as far as I can tell

      The odds of winning in any court of the land against any green policy incentive or legislation is in the favor of the people when against the govt.

      The odds are like and actually tuned to and in context of the Congressional testimonies……3 versus 1, when the 1, is the laughing stock, which can not be considered otherwise in any kind of rationale arena of judgement…..no good at all in any matter of defense to the green mannure by any govt…

      It is all up to you now, the people of the USA………Make the rest of the world proud, about you and your amazing unique constitution……

      Please do try to enjoy it….for what ever worth….it is amazing….

      cheers

      • This will also provide moral support for those eastern European nations that aren’t drinking the ecoKoolaide.

      • Rhoda
        It may – might – perhaps, strengthen the sinews of those here who consider this a Kleptocrat’s dream.

        Auto, in south London.

    • I dunno, Generalist, we might have to put a wall around your state to keep the rest of us from becoming californicated.

  5. No renegotiation. Send it to the Senate for their vote, as all treaties are required to do.

  6. I am watching the announcement. Trump is washing the Paris Accord in holy water and burying it in a crossroads with a stake in its heart.

  7. Great news for the U.S. and world!!

    The biased climate alarmist MSM and climate alarmist governments will have their heads “exploding” all over the world.

  8. Trump’s practice of coal-diss interruptus is a model for a climate sex-crazed world.

  9. Congratulation, it will take some time before Europe follows suite but it’s just a matter of time.

      • Ernest
        They may look at that.

        See Hungary, and perhaps others.
        Frau Merkel’s open door to, well, anyone [who can drive a truck through a Christmas Market (or should I not mention that?)] did not help one whit.

        Auto

      • PJB – there’s cold champagne in my refrigerator – but not for long. Not gonna wait for the Sun to drop below the yardarm. POP!! Here’s to DJT, Lindzen, Soon, Singer, Happer, Dyson, Morano, Cruz, Lamar Smith, cwon14, Anthony, and all the rest of the team and the whole gang at WUWT – far too many to mention here.

    • @Johan M – There’s no point in any country staying in now that the U.S. piggy bank is off the table.

      • True. The Paris Accord was never about the climate, but about transferring Western (mainly US) wealth to the undeserving Third World.

    • Ernest Bush

      “They will have to pull out of the EU first.”

      So, ze evil EU dos indeed control everything zat goes on in every eendividual member state.

      Eeentresting.

  10. A triumph of reason and science fact over belief in religous science fiction that must not be challenged (as its making too much money for its insiders at our expesnse, while making the CO2 emissions net worse than gas and nuclear with no overpriced BS renewables in the process (they don’t want you to know that.) CEng, CPhys, MBA.

  11. Now all we need to do is continue harping on about the trillions of dollars that are to be “spent” — by whom and given to whom and to do what precisely? — which will have precisely zero impact on climate, on world temperature, on sea level, on arctic ice, on polar bears, on tornados, hurricanes, cyclones, coral reefs, except (perhaps) at the margins and certainly not in the lifetime of anyone currently on this planet.

    The Paris agreement like all the others has no scientific rationale and is designed only to impoverish mankind to satisfy the control freaks in the environmental movement.

    Nothing else matters.

  12. Listening to the coverage, whether CNN or FNC, there is still the underlying assumption that “97% of climate scientists agree…..” Perhaps we need a contest to come up with a rebuttal of that “Fake Science” which has real punch and can be said in 5-10 sentences or less? As long as this meme is out there, people will get away with disparaging his actions as an ignorant, greedy capitalist.

    • If there really was a climate issue, then the advocates of intervention wouldn’t need to “tell lies with facts”, such as the well known the warmest year/month ever recorded.

      The proof of their dishonesty is found within their own words.

    • I think it would be better to simply name as many skeptical scientists as we can, and demand that they name 97 “scientists with the correct views” for each skeptical scientist we name. For extra credit, have them name scientists who’s revenue sources are not 100% dependent on finding human causes to warming.

    • What skeptics need to do is create a list of all the failed predictions that have been made for CAGW, as a counter to the alarmists running out all their talking points, including the 97 percent talking point.

      You can bet the alarmists will be saying Trump’s actions are going to cause this or that dire consequence, and they will be repeating it like a mantra.

      So skeptics need a list of all their past failed predictions to demonstrate that these people are just hysterical and are always getting the predictions wrong, so people shouldn’t listen to them because they don’t know what they are talking about.

    • I agree. Trump has shown real leadership tonight. How I wish we had such leadership in Britain now.

      • The Fake Stream Media: “It’s Our Job to Control What People Think.”
        Don’t believe ANYTHING the MSM tell you.They LIE.
        Take heart,there is more to mizz May than the ENEMEDIA are telling us.

      • +1

        “How I wish we had such leadership in Britain now.”

        Perhaps we should emigrate. Don’t you just have to commit a crime then sneak in over the border to get lots of benefits and a free lawyer to fight any suggested repatriation?

  13. Joel says: “He kept his promise. This is what happens when a man is simply what he says he is, and does his best to live up to it. Leading by example.”

    Please, it is not as if Mr Trump’s predecessor promised, and failed, to close Guantanamo, lower average health insurance premiums, provide speedy and transparent responses to Open Records / Freedom of Information requests, or keep us out of war-like engagements without Declarations of War by Congress.

    Keeping a promise, a deal, one’s side of the bargain — it is just government as usual. Which is no doubt why Mr Trump, a business dealer rather than a politician, is so odd about the process.

    • Um, that was Joel’s point. Trump is what he says he is, his predecessor was not. Not even close, in fact, and that one’s supporters screamed the loudest about what he was vs. what he said he was. “That’s not what he meant!” was a mantra I grew tired of hearing.

      • I think he was be facetious, and highlighting the comparison to Trump’s ‘predecessor’.

      • “Trump is what he says he is, his predecessor was not.”

        Right. Trump was going to repeal the ACA in his first 30 days. Didn’t do that. He was going to build a wall. hasn’t done that – in part because the predominately Republican states that have borders with mexico don’t want one. he was going to drain the swamp – he’s asked for more conflict of interest waivers than any other President.

      • That’s all pretty self-serving of you Chris. What Trump’s done against unprecedented resistance and near constant political assassination is really quite admirable.

        Unclench and stop projecting.

      • Joel said: “What Trump’s done against unprecedented resistance and near constant political assassination is really quite admirable.”

        Quite amusing, Trump has a majority in the House and Senate and still can’t get things done. Thanks for confirming that you are a person who sails through life almost nonexistent ambitions.

  14. You are probably hearing quiet sounds of relief from taxpayers all over the world!

    Thanks Donald. Thank you to the United States for standing up to Euro-Bullies.

    Your Canadian neighbour may argue with you, but we have many things in common.

    Great news.

    Wayne Delbeke, Faraway, Alberta, Canada.

  15. My sentiments are summed up by Winston Churchill’s statement during WWII : “It is not yet the end, it perhaps is not yet the beginning of the end, but it is certainly the end of the beginning,” The tide has at last turned!

    • “This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”

      The Lord Mayor’s Luncheon, Mansion House, November 10, 1942

      Sorry to be pedantic but he was a great craftsman and worked hard at his speeches.

  16. Thank you President Trump.

    With this announcement, I can unplug from world climate scam fight and the internet, and start my summer holiday that may stretch into the fall. Who knows.

    My guess is rhis will start a world-wide unraveling of the socialist agenda disguised as CAGW alarmism.

    My Unplugging:
    Step 1. Delete Twitter account
    Step 2. Turn off email news alerts-feeds.
    Step 3. Get off the internet completely.

    Getaway:
    Step 5. Pack up the dog in the car, go visit my folks.
    Step 6. Get a travel trailer, and hit the road sightseeing.
    Enjoy cheap gas.
    Frack, baby, frack. Make OPEC hurt, bad.

    And an “especial” Thanks to Anthony for all these years of fighting the good fight against climate alarmism and exposing the climate liars like Mann, Cook, Lewandowski, Romm, Borenstein, Algore, Nye, etc.

    Best to all.
    Joel

  17. Which countries will follow and how fast will they do it? US withdrawal means the rent-seekers will have to look elsewhere.

  18. What a day! What a day! Finally, someone with the chutzpah to defy the AGW Climate Machine. As far as I’m concerned Trump just earned 10 “get out of jail free” cards.

  19. Meanwhile, in NYC, Mayor Deh Blahsio has vowed to stay in the accord and shut down all of the extensive coal mining operations underneath the streets of the city.

    • Hey, the Lefties and their donor class are invited to knock themselves out subsidizing all the Green Weird their checkbooks can handle; park your Tesla in a solar-panelled garage, eat your poop-infused hydroponic kale and give everything left over to the UN; just don’t expect the U.S. taxpayer to prop up this lie any longer.

      • “Hey, the Lefties and their donor class are invited to knock themselves out subsidizing all the Green Weird their checkbooks can handle;”

        That’s right. Feel free to take charge of New York’s climate, Bill de Blasio, just don’t ask us to pay for it, pay for it yourself. That goes for all the other Liberal politicians in the country who claim they are going to follow the Paris Agreement anyway. Do your virtue signaling, but don’t ask us to pay for it.

  20. Go back and tell ’em what works best for energy supply and CO2 reduction. Not their BS solutions that can’t on the energy science fact, the only thing it does well is create the bogus renewables industry with its easy profits by law and its hangers on, all paid with our wasted money.

    • Go back and tell them it anti-science to try to reduce CO2 emissions.

      If that happens as a side-effect of efficiency and reductions of real pollution, so be it…

      … but it is way past time that we stopped pandering to the idea that CO2 emission is in any way anything but a benefit.

      • The atmosphere started off as CO2 and water vapour. Plants ate all the CO2 back to trace levels they still maintai, to keep themselves ad us alive. Why woud this process not work just as well for the tiny amount we produce, a simple green up fixes all. And anyway, CO2 is mainly a consequence of the Oceans, vocanos and life, not a real problem, the controlling heat for the climate is in the long term thermal store of the oceans, 1,000 times as much as is in the atmosphere. The solar variation is weather, noise on the bigger picture..

  21. Excellent speech! Also, Pruitt’s speech makes it a one-two punch. A knock-out blow to the Paris “agreement”, and to the CAGW hegemony.

    • Some people are saying that Trump is the Second Coming of Reagan, but I think Reagan was just the First Coming of Trump.

      • IDK time will tell, personalty I credit Reagan with Ending the cold-war and setting the country on a trajectory of prosperity that took two Bushes and a Clinton to end. Trump is off to a good start.

      • One thing Reagan and Trump have in common is both of them know/knew what they want to do and how to get there. They have core values and they are not deterred by how the leftwing political wind is blowing at the time.

  22. Woo Hoo !! There is going to be an utter meltdown on tonight’s Network “News”. If we could harness it we COULD “leave it in the ground.”

  23. Thank you Anthony Watts

    Long hard road

    Hats off to you

    Almost as tough as installing sonic and metal detection sensors on the Ho Che Mein trails in Laos!!!???

    Igloo white

  24. As I explain to my alarmist acquaintances: You don’t give someone chemotherapy when they don’t have cancer. The Paris Accord is chemotherapy.

    • But you forget the precautionary principle. To make sure you don’t get cancer, all your organs should be replaced, your limbs cut off, and you need three regimens of chemo.

  25. After his election there were a lot of political troublemakers out on the streets . this decision will enrage the climate activists AND his political opponents and presumably they may be out on the streets again in large numbers?

    Tonyb

    • There are certain sections of the Rust Belt which I wouldn’t recommend the Environ@zis try to invade.

    • I’m curious as to how big this is going to blow up on the Left.

      No doubt there will be some protest marches because the Left has organized and has lots of money to throw around to pay marchers, so I would expect we will see some of them, but I wonder just how much energy there is in this movement. We will certainly find out in the near future.

      • The Fortune 1000 – in other words, the companies that are the backbone of the US economy, have called this a colossal mistake. They will do their best to work around it. They will not let a clueless President stop their efforts.

    • That’s why we needed someone like this. To break out of the politics as usual straightjacket.

  26. Genuine respect and admiration to Trump and America. The first head of the hydra has been removed from the monstrosity of the AGW myth.
    And I am also heartened as it reinforces democracy. He has done what he promised ( probably in the face of a barrage of criticism and lobbying)
    Trump made some high profile pledges
    The travel ban frustrated by the judiciary
    The Wall no significant progress
    If he had failed to deliver on this then people may have turned away from democratic elections to favour the less attractive forms of human governance.
    God bless America.

      • “Most countries today need someone like Trump …”

        One thing about it, Trump’s leadership will rub off on other leaders. His actions are going to make everyone pause and think about basic issues, and other natural born leaders around the world will step up. Monkey see, monkey do.

      • Yes, I’d definitely vote Trump if I were an American. I also hope he will make progress cutting taxes and regulation.

        I would have been a life-long Conservative voter, but no longer. I will not vote for them until they have promised to scrap the Climate Change Bill, which will achieve nothing but human misery.
        I didn’t watch the leader’s debate (minus the PM) but apparently Paul Nuttall was the only leader to believe that Trump was right to leave. I’ll definitely be voting UKIP next Thursday.

        Trump’s speech was excellent, but there was one disappointment: there was no mention of the massive problems in climate science. But he did make one powerful point: that if Paris were fully implemented, by the end of the century it would reduce the global temperature by – drum roll please – 0.2C (according to Lomberg it would be just 0.05C).

        The Paris agreement is a criminal act based on wrong and possibly fraudulent science, on massive vested interests and on the desire to destroy the independence of national democracies.
        What Trump did yesterday has made the world a better place, particularly for the poor. But there is still much work to do……
        Chris

    • Taking back American soverignty; at three minutes to midnight, too. Good thing the Leftists were so overconfident, so sure they had it in the bag, that they showed their hand last summer. Hillary’s Sore Loser Tour is all they’ve got left . . . oh, and Cher. Maybe she’ll give that Kathy Griffin loser a job, too.

      • I figure that Kathy Griffin will start off on a new comedy tour, opening for Bill Cosby and sharing his tour bus.

      • “Hillary’s Sore Loser Tour”

        Yeah, what a pathetic display. Even the Democrats are getting sick of her.

    • London–no progress on the wall, but illegal border crossings from Mexico are way, way down, and illegal arrests are way up. Seems that just the thought of Trump has a lot to do with that.

  27. What a masterstroke!!! America out, but will “re-negotiate”. Hey America, NOW you’re back. Also I hope Anthony sees this as vindication for the hard yards he has done in putting our side of the story out there. Bravo!!

    • I totally agree. No politician can run to accept the old US Paris accord deal.

      Why would the US pay the majority of the $200 billion/year ‘green fund’?

      The punks at the UN, say the $200 billion/year is only a start. The actual number, they say will be, around 2020, be closer to $1 to $2 trillion dollars/year.

      Sound like a bad ‘deal’ for the US?

  28. thank you President Trump.
    thank you Anthony Watts and all those in the CAGW sceptic community.

  29. Congratulations on stalwart organizing. I hate the result, and I fear history will as well, but I admire the persistence

    • Organizing? Poor misguided Bill. It is the truth that is beating you. Sad that you do not yet see that. Maybe someday you will.

      • You have it right, Bruce, it is the truth that is winning the day.

        Nobody is less organized than the skeptic community. It was all Trump, with a few inputs from skeptics.

      • Bruce, the Fortune 1000, most of the world’s countries, the world’s scientific bodies, all say Trump is wrong. Sad that you don’t see that. History will prove you wrong – of course, you’ll still say it’s natural variation. How depressing to go through life with no true intellectual curiosity.

      • Chris

        I’m sure you can provide me with a list showing all the Fortune 500/1000 companies that have said that AGW is not a major concern.

        And, under Obama’s regime of corruption and his legislation-by-decree, control-by-anonymous-bueauracrats, NO company can say in public ANYTHING contrary to his dictatorship. He did, after all, put out of business a single bakery who opposed his homosexual agenda, declared climate change the priority for his Defense Dept in a time when his soldiers were being killed in the countries he sent to fight, and set his Sec of State fighting climate change. In 2009, he killed auto companies who did not support his government. To repeat, NO company who wished to survive his dictatorship could say “No.” And many, like my own, used his subsidies to scheme billions from his government in windmills, solar events, and endless “summits” and propaganda sessions.

      • Sorry, that does not qualify for many reasons, not the least of which is that the link does not contain quotes from even “most” (as is purported) supporting Paris. Nor are the quotes in the article sourced, and the link is to a decidedly proven fake news source (proven so).

        So once again, link to the quotes of all 1000 CEOs showing support for the Paris Accord. Put up or shut up.

      • RA Cook, your assertion is that Obama intimidate companies into compliance. So now, with Trump in office, they should not feel shackled. Please provide links proving that many of those companies are now saying different things about climate change.

    • Maybe you should look in a mirror and question your idea of reality ? Just a thought……

    • A “problem” which is NO problem is NO PROBLEM. Time to worry about something that’s real, and in need of solving; like Ebola, cancer, autism, and traffic jams. This has restored my faith in common sense over popular delusions and the madness of crowds–and big, BIG lies.

    • Not to diminish Anthony’s role in providing a forum for dissident voices to be heard, but to chalk this up to “organizing” is either naive or damning with faint praise. “Organizing” is what you do to shape an outcome that isn’t likely to stand on the merits. This site, and the voices that it empowers, isn’t “organizing” anything. To borrow an oft mis-used phrase, we’re just “speaking truth to power.” As one who came of age in the 1960’s, and lived through the Greening of America, in those days it seemed that it was the left “speaking truth” to the power of the right. My, how times have changed!

      • Anth@ny’s blog brought together people to improve their understanding of CACA. IMO, that could be considered a form of organizing, even though the people “organized” came here of their own accord.

      • Chimp,

        I think my view of “organizing” has been influenced by the association with “community organizer,” “trade union organizer,” etc. I see your point, but still think that the term has a taint to it.

    • I’ll bet that in the future people will look back and think”What the hell were our ancestors smoking?CO2 caused global warming?Ridiculous!”

    • Bill.
      This is more about truth than organizing. Global warming is not a real issue and psueadoscients and their useful idiots are the only ones who claim it is.

      • “Global warming is not a real issue and psueadoscients and their useful idiots are the only ones who claim it is.”

        So I guess you are calling the Fortune 1000 useful idiots.

    • BM, if you had studied the actual science, you would not fear this result. Observational ECS is half of CMIP5 models. And those models are disproven by other means like the lak of a modeled Tropical Troposphere Hot Spot. Despite all your shenanigans, you lost to truth speaking skeptics.
      Truth will out.

    • ” I hate the result, and I fear history will as well, ”
      Don’t fear, Bill. You alarmists are always wrong in predictions.

  30. I’m having this conversation on the Guardian report. Copying it here as I suspect that it will disappear soon.
    Just for the record, you understand. It’s long so feel free to skip.
    ___
    BigL64 1h ago
    I don’t think there is any intelligent argument for doing this, unless you are on the take from oil companies.
    Pathetic.
    MCourtney BigL64 41m ago
    Read the article:

    The deal also accomplishes LITTLE for the climate
    According to researchers at MIT, if all member nations met their obligations, the impact on the climate would be negligible. The impacts have been estimated to be likely to reduce global temperature rise by less than .2 degrees Celsius in 2100.

    So mainstream science makes it clear – this isn’t about climate.
    It’s the economy, stupid (to quote Clinton).
    Also note why China welcomes this plan.

    Under the Accord, China will actually increase emissions until 2030

    Which is a relative advantage for China compared to the US (and EU) jobs. Because cheap energy is good for the economy.
    There is clearly an intelligent argument to be made.
    1) The Paris Accords make no measurable impact on the climate (0.2°C is within the measurement error let alone the model error).
    2) The Paris Accords weaken the US economy relative to China.
    3) The US president may be owned by Russia but he isn’t owned by China.
    BigL64 MCourtney 29m ago
    Your entire argument relies on the assumption that the US is pulling out to pursue a better, more impactful climate change initiative.
    They aren’t.
    This administration is pulling out because, like the EPA, climate change regulations represent a danger to short term business growth opportunities.
    Who gives a fuck about the economy if we don’t have a planet to spend descretionary income on? Our children’s children will be living on a desert waste land, fighting over water and cock roaches, but hey, at least those fuckin coal miners kept their jobs for a few more years and we stuck two fingers to china.
    Also, China is likely welcoming the US withdrawl. It gives them the power seat and, as they grow in influence, the us will continue to struggle.
    ID2872597 MCourtney 16m ago
    Well said McCourtney! Now if only some one actually read your post rather than screeching.
    OurPlanet ID2872597 9m ago
    I have read his post one and twice, meanwhile you may need to take off your filtered
    short termist specs and open your eyes to the big picture and the future of our children and their children. Not unless you are a climate change deniar though , then my argument will fall on deaf ears.
    ID2872597 OurPlanet
    EEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
    MCourtney BigL64 7m ago
    No. My argument is that the US is pulling out to benefit their economy.
    And that that is a sensible thing to do as Paris will harm their economy while doing nothing for the climate.
    You may be right about China. But I suspect that their influence will be proportional to their economic strength.
    After all, China has no moral authority on the Climate. They have no responsibilities until 2030. That’s far beyond any meaningful political timeframe.
    MCourtney 5m ago
    0.2°C is not a threat to the planet. It is not measurable as it’s too small. And it’s well within the error boundaries of the models.
    The only person denying the science in this conversation is you.

    ___
    Hopefully this will not be deleted by the Guardian but my experience is not positive.

    • For completeness. Again, please ignore my use of this website as a Cloud resource.
      ___
      BigL64 ID2872597 1h ago
      Troll identified. Ignore.
      MCourtney BigL64 1h ago
      I did read your post. The key mistake it made was to equate 0.2°C with “living on a desert waste land, fighting over water and cock roaches”.
      The poverty you are campaigning for is real. Those miners have families they need to provide for. Your lack of compassion is cruel.
      The disaster you fantasise is not real. It is not the effect of 0.2°C. It is the effect of playing Fallout 4 on LSD.
      BigL64 MCourtney 53m ago
      You’re flailing. You’re also misrepresenting my point. I didn’t say a .2 degree C increase leads to an apocalypse.
      I was obviously implying that the current administration is disengenuous in their justification for pulling out of the deal. You’ve eloquently repeated ever single republican talking point on the subject. The reality remains the same: well what the fuck else do you purpose?
      Republicans have this amazing ability to burn down the house, forgetting they need somewhere to live.
      I also don’t give a shit about coal miners because they represent a statistically insignificant amount of the population (globally). I don’t care if their grand daddy pulled fossilised dead animals out of a fucking mountain. My great grand kids don’t need to die from climate change to preserve that useless tradition among many others. That’s of course saying nothing of the fact that, under the right political structure, those miners could be paid to get re-trained in clean energy jobs.
      You’re part of the problem.
      Vikash B MCourtney 51m ago
      A point which you are not considering that, there is almost nothing we can do, that will suddenly reverse this terrible damage we have been doing the past few centuries.
      No single convention like this can guarantee a significant reduction in temperatures, within a century.
      But, we have to start somewhere, we can’t keep waiting around for some magical solution that may never arrive.
      MCourtney BigL64 40m ago
      Read the article. The reason that the Paris Accords were rejected was economic. And the Trump administration is in line with mainstream science when it claims that they have virtually no impact on the climate.
      You don’t care about the poor. I do. We will disagree.
      I see you as part of the problem. Bourgeois, callous elitists who think “that minority is irrelevant. Me and my progeny are all that matters”.
      You are wrong.
      After all, if clean energy was cheaper than coal there would be the money and the will to retrain those miners. It would happen if that was where the wealth comes from. But you and China know it isn’t. That money isn’t there.
      MCourtney Vikash B 33m ago
      That defeatist argument has two obvious responses:
      1) Do something that would work. Something big. Don’t waste everyone’s time (and jobs) on this policy. If you care about the climate you should want something that would work.
      Or my preferred policy:
      2) Just adapt. It’s cheaper. It’s future-proof. It naturally leads to the richer, technologically advanced countries doing the work and the poorer ones getting the benefits. It prevents over-spend if the climate sensitivity estimates keep falling. It releases resources today for today’s problems.
      Why should the third world have their development delayed for more expensive energy? Dead children don’t have grandkids anyway.

    • Keep fighting the good fight. Bravo. Of course Guardian will eventually delete. But the archive is already here to prove their dishonest bias. Skeptics are winning, and every skirmish counts.

      • True dat, Goldrider. “Studies have shown” [wink, wink] that canaries and budgies don’t want it for cage liner. Dead fish can’t object to the treatment.

  31. Wow. This is a sort of “split the baby” move. Suggesting renegotiating probably mollifies Ivanka, and some critics. But I would say this treaty is as good as most sincerely dead. By the way Musk has threatened a resignation of all his advisory posts in government. Trump simultaneously ended the Paris fraud, and improved these advisory groups!

    • The agreement is totally dead until India and China agree to cuts, stop all new coal plants, and pay others in the third world to assist them in the agreement. Since this is never going to happen, the agreement is permanently dead, while putting the blame on them, where it belongs. Being in an agreement while doing nothing is an agreement of fools.

  32. I really had my doubts this past week that he would stick to his promise. I, like most everybody else who has posted before me, could not be happier! Finally some sanity! Can’t wait to see the spin from the MSM this evening and tomorrow. They will all be predicting that we will soon be dying in rising boiling oceans.

    Trump for President!!! oh, wait, he already is President.

  33. Congratulations to Anthony and to all those who have put so many years the truth about climate on the first place! Thank you all!

  34. The Chinese at a meeting in EU says that they will tick to their commitments. Is that a joke? What commitments? Werent they allowed to just continue increaring CO2 emissions?? Until 2030? Oh, but China will stay on their commitments. Good for you China.

    • As a developing nation, one of their commitments is to receive billiions of dollars.

    • China is going to stick to their agreement, despite the stress, to infinitely increase CO2 until all current EU administrations are not in power, and the next ones forget the agreement. China is in fact religious. You can hear the “amen.”

      • Maybe we can drop a house on them, and watch their feet curl up. Actually, that sounds like the cover of tomorrow morning’s New York Post . . . ;-)

    • That will ruin his economy twice as fast as now and put an end to his regime as Beau of Ottawa faster.

    • Trudeau is a follower, not a leader. So, who does he follow? Seems to me, he has to follow Trump given that our economies are completely intertwined. But maybe he can hold out for three years … but if he does, he’ll just be a paragraph in the history books.

      • Wayne, unfortunately Justin responds to public opinion when it agrees with his life-guide, Gerald Butthurts. Triple whammy Carbon tax, and in BC, the giggling coalition mumble about a 4 cent/km driving tax to replace bridge tolls. That’s 40c/l in my car, 80 for a more economical chariot. Weaver may tip the scales if they
        bring in proportional rep – the prospect of 15 or 20 seats after a snap election looms large.

  35. I am deeply disturbed that Trump and Pruitt are both giving lip service to the carbon footprint. Trump boasted about how much America had reduced its CO2 emissions.

    They aren’t calling CAGW a hoax.

    • Well, okay, but it has become axiomatic with scientists who are in the habit of telling the truth – how odd! – the good guys, that they/we/none of us simply do not know how much our carbon dioxide impacts weathery stuff. And that is often combined, in the same pronouncement, with their certainty that industrial and agricultural emissions have *some* effect. So let’s cut the president and his people some slack. This is some very heavy lifting they are doing, and doing it well.

    • Worry knot. It doesn’t matter. The Paris Accord only pretended to be about science, and about “climate change”. Trump saw through that, and struck at its heart. It was about bringing the Western economies down, and most especially, the American economy. Part and parcel of the climate hoax is that it is based on science. Ignoring the pseudoscience in a way just makes it irrelevant, which it is.

    • Or, one could say that they are using the CAGW’s concepts to show that the US is already doing better than other countries at the CAGW “game”.

    • IMHO, no one needs to call CAGW a “hoax”. In my view, this particular label may have contributed more to the arsenal of those who conduct the recruitment of the non-informed – by appealing to green-tainted idealism or taking advantage of simple, lazy follow-the-green-brick-road ignorance.

      That being said – and speaking of those whose pronouncements are of the idealistic and/or ignorant kind – I very much regret that we in Canada may have to wait a few years before we have leadership that is not totally tainted by GreenDreams of the utterly useless and very expensive kind.

      Particularly here in beautiful BC, where we are about to be subjected to the oh-so-dedicated dictatorial whims of former IPCC-nik Andrew <climate change is a barrage of intergalactic ballistic missiles> Weaver, as he wields his new-found power (of 3 green bodies) in the provincial legislature :-(

      • … in beautiful BC …

        I would give even odds that Trudeau will be able to protect the pipeline in spite of everything the NDP and Greens can do.

        After 2008, the oil sands and Fort McMoney are the only thing that kept the Canadian economy from tanking along with the rest of the world.

    • I have read your posts and love them. The only way to win or get points politically is to speak to the entire country. Politics should only be partisan when needed. In this case, I get queezy too. Consider that what he said was (in the context of what people think a carbon footprint is) 100% accurate. In that sense, the so called footprint was reduced.

      If he’d started saying that the whole meme of “climate change” is disingenuous and dangerous based on the remedy and the mis-belief of consequences attached to it, he would have lost half of America. So this very significant baby step, of doing the right thing, and attaching many good reasons to leave the Paris Accord, takes us in a wonderful direction.

      In any case, I do hope he will eventually move closer to saying that it is certain, that “the meme of climate change” is a hoax. To believe that so called “climate change”, means increased CO2 caused the climate to get more extreme, is patently false and has and can be illustrated by facts, not news headlines.

      • Mario,

        As someone who has been writing today along the same lines as cBob, I wanted to tell you that you (and others with similar takes on this) have helped me be a bit less upset about the “begin negotiations to re-enter” (MAJOR bummer for me). Boy, that really upset me!!!

        Thank you for your comment…

        Grateful for another wonderful WUWT encourager,

        Janice

    • It’s the 4d chess Trump game. What is there to negotiate if the basic premise of CO2 warming is fraud? It is in fact.

      Longer term we’ll all regret not laying out the skeptic science case at this key moment. How can you go after the green subsidies if you buy into the fake virtue of CO2 reduction?

  36. I’ve popped a favorite brew and I am currently fixated on the carbon dioxide – all those bubbles!! – escaping into the atmosphere, free as birds, without penalty or guilt. What a blessed day.

  37. … and suddenly the sky darkened, the tides surged, a fire cloud spewed forth, and, in the blink of an eye, the world was wiped out by an asteroid. … 06-01-2017

    Crap! … just when something good happened. Well, I guess we should have placed our attention, efforts and money on something else. Oh well, better luck next time, … in another five billion years or so, when it all starts over again.

  38. Elon Musk @elonmusk
    “Am departing presidential councils. Climate change is real. Leaving Paris is not good for America or the world.”

    I’m sure you will not be missed.

    • Maybe he should stop taking the government’s (peoples’) money to keep his crappy business afloat.

    • Ahhhh…. the squeals of another departing hog, as his grubbing snout confirms there is no more taxpayer slop in his trough.
      Music to my ears!!!

      • “Elon, showing his true colors. And they are not red, white, or blue.”

        Elon Musk has created 35,000 good paying jobs in the US, plus even more indirect jobs. How many jobs have you created, Bruce?

      • How much Tax payer money went to create those jobs? With $9 billion (or even $5billion), I am sure anyone can create a slew of jobs.

        So how much profit did he make over the past 5 years?

      • Phljourndan, Amazon hasn’t made a profit of sorts in 20 years, their market cap is 350B. Try to keep up.

      • “of sorts” – You have no clue about business do you? Let me give you the short version.

        no profits = no taxes.

        But Bezos is one of the richest men on the world. And guess what? No government loans OR subsidies.

        Try to keep up.

      • Philjourdan – I worked for Fortune 100 companies for 20 years, then raised millions in venture capital for startups, and helped start two companies. What have you done, besides posting on WUWT dozens of times per day?

        As far as your Amazon versus Elon Musk point, you said: “of sorts” – You have no clue about business do you? Let me give you the short version.”

        I said “of sorts” meaning that Amazon generally eked out a very small profit – numbers like $500M in profit on $30B in sales for a quarter, or 1.6% of sales. I thought you would understand that, but I clearly overestimated your abilities. My bad.

        You then said:”But Bezos is one of the richest men on the world. And guess what? No government loans OR subsidies.”

        Wrong, subsidies alone total $1.2B and counting.https://www.bna.com/amazon-close-breaking-n57982085432/ And of course that doesn’t include the billions in sales tax that Amazon refused to pay states for years, and fought in the courts.http://www.alternet.org/corporate-accountability-and-workplace/amazons-big-assist-government Not paying the taxes they owed is to a large degree the reason Amazon has been able to take market share and grow rapidly.

      • So you failed math as well. NOt surprising. Did I ask you what you did?

        No. I do not care. But I do know one thing for sure. You did not do what you claim you did. Since you boasted about accomplishments not asked for nor wanted, they are typically false. Even if true, they mean nothing.

        And you can keep your “of sorts” since you still have no clue what you are talking about. Just answer the simple question: How much in government loans did Amazon get?

        And you are lying. Show me any company (not 1000, not even 10, ONE) that pays more in taxes than it is legally required to do so. Just one. Anyone.

        You cannot, because A) you have no clue what you are talking about, and B) there are none. Amazon did not pay taxes it was not required to pay. And guess what else? Sales taxes are paid by the CUSTOMERS. The companies merely collect it for the government (usually getting a 3/4 of a cent fee for doing so). Since Amazon was not legally required to collect the taxes, and since Amazon is not liable for ANY sales taxes (the consumer is), you are lying and have no clue what you are talking about,.

        Your ignorance and arrogance is your down fall. Had you actually done what you claimed, you would know these things. As you do not, you are a very bad liar, with delusions of Walter Mitty.

        Stop lying and making impotent boasts.

    • Now he can get on with colonizing Mars. There are a lot of people whot could be sent to help.

    • TSLA closed down today, while the indeces were making record highs. But not by as much as it was down earlier. Volume however was higher than average.

  39. “No responsible leader can put the workers and the people of their country at this debilitating and tremendous disadvantage.”

    I wonder when the ‘politicians’ in Sweden will realize this …? In the end, they are very expensive well fare absorbers, not realizing they are not just ‘cutting the branch they sit on’, but the complete tree …

  40. Anthony, this is your day too! You and Jo Nova are the last ones standing, following the great work of Climate Audit and Bishop Hill. Oh and of course Climate Etc.

    We need to look ahead. Next is the UNFCCC. Can get out of that easier and quicker than Paris.

    And then a biggie, the Endangerment Finding. For some reason, Scottt Pruitt has not felt comfortable taking that on, but maybe this will give him some heart. It should be EASY to blow it out of the water, just count in the greening of the world, the increase in food production, the failure of the models, and the previous pillars of the EPA argument are swept away.

  41. A decision Obama never should have made has been revoked. I hope there is more of this sort in the pipe.
    Not a bad idea to propose re-negotiations: don’t slam the door, close it gently and reopen it when terms and conditions are favorable. That gives other nations the time to learn that CAGW and its connection to CO2 is frivolous.

  42. Wow! Watched this moment live in Johannesburg, South Africa. Well done Sir! This will shake up things in this country – a pathetic tail-wagging sycophant of the IPCC and the Paris non-agreement.

  43. Still worried. Not such a good day. CO2 was still considered a bad thing. A win for economics but a loss for science. The science is really the more important issue.

    • Really ? a loss for science ? hardly … now the real science debate can begin … and the warmists are bringing butter knives to a gun fight …

      • I hope Leonard and Kaiser are right and that it will be a good day for science. The fact that Trump was not defending the skeptical science view in his speech might be actually a good thing. Someone said it was probably good that Trump did not bring the science argument up and after thinking about that, I now have to agree.

    • 1+

      The crowd on either side isn’t very logical. The President isn’t that interested in this policy. I doubt the greens will be squeezed at all.

  44. There is plenty of rational to support the idea that the climate sensivity of CO2 is zero so any change in the CO2 content of our atmosphere will have no effect on climate. So even if fully implimented, the Paris Climate Agreement will have no effect on climate. The major players in climate change are the sun and the oceans and they are not a part of the Paris Climate Agreement. Even if we could somehow stop the Earth’s climate from changing as it has for eons, extreme weather events and sea level rise would continue because they are part of our current climate. So in terms of climate change, the Paris Climate Agreement is of no value.

  45. Good speech for flyover country. But we still have to knock out the 97% and science is settled nonsense, which is the underlying rot. I had hoped he would touch on those points also:

    Been warming naturally since the LIA; last Thames ice fair was 1814.
    Except for the now rapidly cooling 2015-16 El Nino blip, no warming this century despite it comprising ~35% of all the atmospheric increase in CO2 since 1958.
    No tropical troposphere hotspot except in models that demonstrably run hot, with ECS ~2x observed.
    Sea level rise not accelerating.
    Polar bears thriving.
    Planet greening thanks to CO2 fertilization.
    Neither Tuvalu nor Arctic summer sea ice have disappeared.

    • True that he implied that CO2 is pollution. But economic issues are still important, and show that alarmism is at least exaggerated, if not totally unjustified, as is the case in reality.

  46. Common sense wins one, over the dark forces of “propaganda distribution” and intimidation tactics. Skepticism and “reproduction of results” are the crucible of science. And a nasty bit of slag, was kept out of the wallets of taxpayers.

  47. I love this president. He’s the right man at the right time. He meets with people who disagree with him, to get all sides of the debate. I am so happy to watch, hopefully, Mr Tesla (Elon Musk) leave the administration as his company stock declines…
    Even Accuweather bloggers want to withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord, at 67%!!!

    What is not to love about Trump?

    • “…as his company stock declines…”

      From your lips to GOD’s ears. Make it so #1.

    • “I love this president. He’s the right man at the right time.”

      He is. We are SO lucky! And those on the Left are completely oblivious to the fact that Trump is putting the U.S. and the world back on the right track. All they see is their “wrong track” going down the tubes.

  48. Damn. I’m on the hind tit but after 166 comments, the adult is in charge of the children !!@!

    There is hope we can believe in !!!

  49. Hot Damn. It’s wonderful. The problem is that pulling out alone does not not correct the fallacy that there is something wrong with the climate now, or that there is something wrong with the direction the climate is headed. People still actually believe that mankind are adversely affecting the climate. And many still believe that carbon dioxide is a problem. In other words, the liberal brain washing has been pretty effective. Until truth wins, we still have a big problem.

    • Take away the possibility of the scam achieving it’s objectives and there becomes no reason to continue it. Funding for the BS dries up.

      • Good point. My hope too is that the money will dry up. Then what will be the next big lie/scam from the left to destroy the USA, free market capitalism, and freedom of speech and religion? I guess we could keep our eyes on Al’s investments to see where he puts his money next. If Christ raptures His church soon, Al would have lots of spin material he could use, and he’d still be around to spin it.

  50. From a UK perspective this is great news.
    Especially as Weak and Wobbly May will have to put clear blue water between her and the UKIPpers or endorse Trump’s actions.

    Tory civil war back on with one week to go…

    • M,

      IMO there isn’t enough Tory civil war in Christendom to elect Corbyn PM. More UKIP seats would just strengthen the coalition.

      JMHO from across the pond, but I lived in the UK during the electorally tumultuous ’70s.

  51. It would have been unwise for Trump himself to attempt to counter the science. Let that happen naturally with an improved and less ideologically biased distribution of grant funds.

  52. Serving Pittsburgh not Paris! Yes,thank you!!!!! It’s enough to bring tears to my eyes!!

    • Here is what the Mayor of Pittsburgh said about Trump’s announcement:

      Responding to Trump’s pointing to his city, Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto called the decision “disastrous for our planet, for cities such as Pittsburgh,” and a step that “has made America weaker and the world less safe.”

  53. Today is a big day. After 10 years on this web sight I feel like a big accomplishment has been attained. Maybe the CAGW activists might be willing to engage in proper science henceforth. I would like to see worthy science done.

    Now that the Administration has effectively cracked the myth of CAGW, and in effect institutionalized skepticism, I feel that my desires relative to truth in science are now fulfilled.

    Today has made me very happy. Thanks Anthony for the hard work. I am sorry for the sacrifices you have been forced to suffer along the way. Adieu.

    • Unfortunately, CAGW activists will not be willing to engage in proper science, seeing as they never have done. That has never been their motive, and never will be. Total destruction of the myth is the only possibility. Yes, that means some livelihoods and lives will be destroyed in the process. But that is what they signed up to.

  54. MAGA Ditto. The POTUS made a promise and kept it. He took a giant step towards MAGA and a big step towards winning a second term. This truck driver has 700 miles to do tomorrow to get home and should be climbing in the sleeper now but I’m far too excited. I Love it when my country and countrymen win and this was a big one the people and for our kids.

  55. The New York Times is strongly urging people to make their feelings known in a little under four years because it will tkae longer than that for the US to fully withdraw. Firstly, I bet London to a brick that Trump gets the US out a whole lot faster than that – withdrawl from the UN Climate Change Council anyone? Secondly, I would think Trump and the GOP would be ecstatic to fight the next election on the Paris Accord. If they can make it the central issue at the midterms the Dems had better “brace for impact”.

    • The timeframe to withdraw is zero. You walk out. Negotiating something new is dependent on China and India doing something and paying, which isn’t going to happen. The third world is in the agreement only to get paid. So the agreement is totally dead. Just leeches and wannabies will be hanging out.

    • the Paris agreement was always un-Constitutional and illegal … we are out … as of 3:01 today …

  56. Wasn’t convinced he would but overjoyed he did. He hit on every key point perfectly. Best day ever.

  57. Once can see it on the stock markets:

    Shanghai Composite
    ISIN: CNM000000019
    3.102,62PKT-14,55PKT-0,47%

    Dow Jones + 0,58 %

    I think, the Chinese would loose.

  58. The people of the (not) Federal Reserve , the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank will not be happy.
    Without a blood supply a cancer can’t live.

    • John, he went out of his way to not challenge basic climate fraud science and left the UN authority cartel untouched.

    • cwon14 – the background for the Paris Accord exit was created by all the skeptic science efforts and the exit was aided by the public seeing the consensus’ pseudo science charade.

      • John,

        He didn’t challenge the science at all. He offered to renegotiate? If it’s fraud why make that offer?

        Look it’s some progress even with the economic only approach. All I’ll point out is the Reagan is 5x any President since at he took the economics only logic against the Greenshirts and it’s been down hill for 30 years.

        It’s the mendacity of the green blob, the Orwellian lie of the science that has to be central to winning the debate long term. That wasn’t focus of the day at all.

  59. Algore and mike mann may have just had an anualuranism. Good news for the world !!!!!

  60. Congratulations to the POTUS and his countrymen (those that voted for him) for beginning to
    put to bed the ridiculous conjecture of AGW and CAGW .
    Mike from Aus

  61. It is almost as if Trump and/or Pruitt visited WUWT. Frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised.

    • Why not, Trump will manage with 4-5 hours of sleep. More than enough time to get information on the Internet.

    • It’s funny you mention that, Bruce. I’ve been watching these Fox News reporters for the last few days, after it was becoming apparent Trump was about to make a decision on the Paris Agreement, and I was struck by how well-informed most of the reporters and pundits were about the issues, and I thought to myself, they probably have been reading WUWT. And why not? Where else would someone go for good information on the climate but the most read website on the subject.

      • I might add that Chris Wallace and Shepard Smith should both read WUWT. After listening to their commentary this afternoon before Trump’s speech, it is obvious that they are not up to speed on the CAGW debate.

    • If they do.. then I send a very hearty..

      CONGRATULATIONS. :-)

      Well done, (except the part where you cow-tow a bit to the anti-CO2 agenda.)

  62. It is a hopeful start but the world needs a stake through the heart of the AGW beast or it will rise again with international pressure or a future Dumbocratic administration. There is no rest for us true disbelievers until science is unbound from politics and the world knows the truth about this gigantic fraud.

  63. well done america ,let the global rollback on this nonsense commence. the greatest waste of tax payer dollars known to mankind looks to be coming to an end .

  64. My thanks to “The Donald”. Gives proof to the old saw,”You can’t fool all of the people all of the time”.

  65. The hard UN Framework exit isn’t indicated which means all the junk science cartel members remain in place.

    It’s more intense then the Reagan economic messaging on green excess but it will have the same issues over time. All the usual suspects from climate science corruption keep their jobs and narrative intact with this approach.

    They will hate no less by this gesture. Skeptics pleased with half a loaf as predicted.

  66. My sympathy is for the US sceptics, not much left to fight for, but here in Europe the battle is just about to start, lot of fun to be had,
    We need a European edition of WUWT.

    • Goodness gracious, there will be plenty more to fight for in the US. Besides, we care about humanity itself, unlike the Greenie thugocracy.

      • How about a simple UN exit? UN is mostly anti-American, did put Gaddafi in charge of human rights, and Saudi Arabia on a woman’s rights commission.

    • No, not over by a long shot.

      We have to utterly destroy the anti-CO2 scam, and that will probably take a lot longer.

    • “My sympathy is for the US sceptics, not much left to fight for,”

      That’s not true. Skeptics still have a science battle to wage over whether CO2 is causing the climate to change.

  67. Thank you, Anthony, for all you’ve done with this site to encourage honest research into climate while also allowing open discussion of the political aspects of CO2-based CAGW.

    Take a bow!

    • “Your comment is awaiting moderation.”

      Oh come on. It’s way past time to get the word f-r-a-u-d out of the list that sends comments to moderation. Or shall we say h-o-a-x?

  68. for all those pearl clutching ninnies who thought Trump would not back out of Paris or he would do some half measure … I would suggest a nice Chianti to help was down the crow :)

  69. Anthony, you and your blog WUWT most certainly deserve a big round of applause for this outcome. You had no idea what you started. But that is how all GREAT ideas start. This accomplishment is on you. The entire world has turned a corner because of what you (and others, of course) started.
    If anyone deserves a Nobel prize, you do.

    • I’ll second that. I have learned so much from this site, the postings, the informed comments and Anthony’s hard work and commitment. In fact I would probably still be a warmist had I not found this site which truly opened my eyes.

      Thank you.

    • I’ve been trying to track down what covfefe means. Some say it’s the capital of Kekistan. Others have memed it into coffee. Some other stuff. Now this. The only thing I can come up with is that it’s a portmanteau of “coverage” and “fake”, with the latter becoming “fefe” (like “cray cray” means “crazy”).

  70. Buuurrrpppp… mmm, popcorn.

    I love the smell of popcorn in the morning… and in the afternoon, and evening.

    As for exploding heads, check out the movie “Mars Attacks”

  71. New York City is saying that they will continue to abide by the Paris climate deal. We’ll see if it is just moral preening or Mayor DeBlasio will actually send the $80M for their portion of the US payments to the foreign bureaucrats. I’m not sure the citizens of New York City will really want to see their money go for that instead of roads and garbage collection.

    • Right now DeBlasio’s city is one solid grid-lock of immovable trains. No one can get anywhere, so they’re slashing each other, running their cars up on the sidewalks, and people are afraid to come out on the streets for fear off the lunatics they allow to sprawl around loose. And NO ONE wants him for President, EVER. Just more delusional-Democrat foaming while his “sanctuary” city gangs behead teenage kids.

  72. This will be regarded as a declaration of war by many. There are a lot of seriously disturbed people out there who can’t be convinced by rational arguments simply because they are totally out of wack with reality. Many of them you find in Politics, Government positions and Institutions. Than we will see a barrage of opposition coming from a number of States. Today Soros claimed that Europe was in a death struggle for it’s survival. Although a political crash would finally provide some breathing room for those shackeld by this horrible political construct, the financial implication could have a massive impact on the lively hoods of may citizens. The Trump opposing response in the Dutch and German media today however was massive and I expect the establshment and their minions will be fighting for the pluche and the free money untill the beitter end. Fowl play and massive propaganda and even treason included. Trump really needs to take care of his personal security. For me his decission was music to my ears simply because his decission restored the old image of the USA as a beacon for freedom in the world. Trump jsut pulled the USA away from the ports of hell. However, without a thorrow clean up to simply remove all the obstructionist that are wheel barrowing massive amounts of sand into wheels of the the governmental crank case, the economic revival won’t come from the ground. As for all those green business that were living from state funded perks and free money I would say grow up, introduce sensible products and solutions that make a positive contribution to the life of US citizens or go extinct if you can’t live with the new reality. I really hope Trump will finally picks up the broom to clean house.

    • “Europe was in a death struggle for it’s survival.”

      It most certainly is.

      The influx of the “religion of piece”

      The fact that the green anti-human, anti-plantlife agenda has taken such a strong hold.

      The fact that the far-left EU agenda is also rife.

      This cannot end well for Europe.

  73. “Fourteen days of carbon emissions alone would totally wipe out the U.S. contribution to reduction by 2030”

    What does this mean? 14 days of emissions by China? I don’t see the context.

  74. The announcement of the US withdrawal from the Paris Accord is a disappointment. Not the withdrawal itself – that is to be celebrated. It is the rationale provided for the withdrawal that is disappointing. He indicates it is because of American jobs (the real focus) and the bad deal for America (sending U.S. funds overseas). It would have been so much more fitting, and accurate, had the rationale also focused on how bad the science is that is supporting CAGW, how bad the politics have become in pushing the CAGW mantra, and how little the actions under the Paris Accord would actually affect future climate.

    As he left it, it is an argument about US jobs versus climate ruin, rather than a more appropriate argument about it being bad science that is predicting climate ruin.

    Nevertheless, I’ll still be celebrating the pullout.

    • You need to see the forest through the trees. The politics of CAGW was their protective cover. It prevented discussion of the non-existent science. Now that has been stripped away. They are left without cover. And they are sitting ducks.

    • Sadly, most of the lay audience isn’t there. The UN Framework left in place to spend years more on the public money politically lobbying efforts for the junk science climate cartel.

      I get and share your point.

    • It would be great if he could deny the science. If all he’s capable of doing is calling it a job-saver, that’s fine. He got it done.

      • … and just be glad (if) you don’t live in a “sanctuary climate city” (NY), or state (CA).

    • @PJ
      “As he left it, it is an argument about US jobs versus climate ruin, rather than a more appropriate argument about it being bad science that is predicting climate ruin.”
      What was left out was that “CO2 is not pollution” and that “severe weather of all kinds have not increased from the norms” The debate is not over, the debate on the science never happened.
      None of the media is discussing the science today…

  75. This is such a welcome and wonderful action by President Trump. It is amazing to share this moment with all of you, as well.

    Thank God. I am just weeping right now, as if a huge weight has been lifted from our household. Well actually a huge weight has been lifted from our household. (:

    Now let’s go after those state mandates for worthless wind, and carbon tax. Here in Wa, we roundly rejected a carbon tax at the ballot box, and immediately afterwards, a bill for a carbon tax was introduced.

    ref
    HB 1646
    Bill Description – Promoting an equitable clean energy economy by creating a carbon tax that allows investment in clean energy, clean air, healthy forests, and Washington’s communities.

  76. Thank you Anthony, and the 315,257,540+ views, the WUWT story submitters, and the posters to this site and it’s debate. It probably wouldn’t have happened without you.

  77. You brilliant man Mr Trump. I watched his announcement live and every word he said was true and gives those of us elsewhere in the world hope in fighting the outright lies, fraud and deceit that characterizes the elitist green warmest agenda. It was followed on the U.K. Broadcast media by a hysterical one-sided succession of untruths about melting polar ice caps, Florida being like Atlantis, pictures of steam being called CO2 etc,etc.
    If only we had a politician in the U.K. with Trump’s courage and vision.
    Well done USA!

    • Yes, Moderately, exactly!

      “It was followed on the U.K. Broadcast media by a hysterical one-sided succession of untruths about melting polar ice caps, Florida being like Atlantis, pictures of steam being called CO2 etc,etc.”

      How on earth can they, the BBC, print the following rubbish on their web site and get away with still being subsidised by the taxpayer?:

      The Agreement accompanying the BBC Charter requires us to do all we can to ensure controversial subjects are treated with due impartiality in our news and other output dealing with matters of public policy or political or industrial controversy. But we go further than that, applying due impartiality to all subjects.

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/impartiality

      I wish I had the money to take them to court.

  78. Trump’s offer to renegotiate = Letting China and India (and other trough feeders) demonstrate their complete hypocrisy. I am all for that renegotiation. The idea of renegotiation is probably already striking terror in their hearts.

    Eugene WR Gallun

  79. The consensus still has its fungal rhizomes lodged in the language of this announcement.

  80. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt is being interviewed on Fox News right now and he said the U.S. seat at the UNFCCC was “secure”. That would seem to signal that Trump is not getting ready to pull out of the UNFCCC. Perhaps because he wants to do a deal with the Israelis and the Palestinians.

  81. Now we have to contend with all the loudmouth local politicians proclaming that they will independently comply with the Paris agreement. Can someone please compile a list (city by city) of how much each city will have to contribute to the Green Slush Fund? Maybe start with Pittsburg, since their mayor seems to have no clue. I think the local taxpayers will not be so impressed when they see what Paris would really cost them.

    • JS +100

      I too was particularly happy to see the President mention Pittsburg that way. I see it as a deliberate opening salvo in the 2020 race. Mr Trump knows full well that Pennsylvania went red for him last time, the first time in a while I have felt my vote was actually worth something. Never doubt that this man is very smart and is planning far, far ahead. Today is a great day, and it looks like we can expect many more.

  82. From Denmark:
    Thank you USA for electing Donald Trump.
    Thank you President Trump for showing historic and true leadership.
    Thank you Anthony Watts for this great website I’ve been following regularly since 2009 (Climategate).
    I’m all for getting Denmark out of the EU but unfortunately am still in a minority here regarding that.

  83. Hey, everybody! Want to have some fun? Lets go to a few alarmist sites and see what they are saying!

    Think i might go and create a collection of quotes and bring them back here.

    Eugene WR Gallun

  84. Anthony, nobody in media, left or right is talking about the science. We have to get that changed to have an impact on public sentiment on the climate change issue.

  85. With thanks and respect to the great and powerful Watts (and of the WOZ)!
    As President of America, In the Country of the Land of US, I welcome you most regally.
    Barrister, “But we’ve got to verify it legally, to see…”
    Mayor, “To see?”
    Barrister, “If she…”
    Mayor, “If she?”
    Barrister, “Is morally, ethic’lly”
    Father No.1, “Spiritually, physically”
    Father No. 2, “Positively, absolutely”
    Munchkins, “Undeniably and reliably Dead”
    All of US in unison, “I must aver, I thoroughly examined her. And she’s not only merely dead, she’s really most sincerely dead.”

    Thanks again Anthony, if it weren’t for your efforts and the efforts / fight of all good skeptics everywhere this might have never occurred (scary thought)…BUT IT DID!

    SO BITE US YOU GLOBAL ELITISTS!

    Cheers!

  86. This is only a skirmish. The battle cannot be won until the claim that CO2 is a dangerous ‘pollutant’ has been well and truly debunked. Otherwise ‘Paris’ or some ‘fair’ substitute will raise its ugly globalist head again. Neither President Trump nor the EPA Administrator even attempted to cast doubt on the myth of evil CO2. Indeed, they both bragged about how we have reduced our ‘CO2 footprint’. So they closed the front door, but left the back door wide open.

    Is the EPA going to continue to ‘regulate’ CO2 emissions?

    https://WalkingCreekWorld.wordpress.com

  87. Exploding heads:
    Academic parasites.
    Commercial parasites.
    Political parasites.
    Public service parasites.
    NGO parasites.
    Organized crime parasites.

  88. With the US running away from this institutionalized climate fleecing, the shearers will have no use for “climate change” anymore.

    I predict in a year there will be studies indicating CO2 has/had nothing to do with the climate at all.

  89. Sea level rise is certain to accelerate after this decision…

    …from all the warmists’ tears.

  90. Anthony,

    Your wonderful venue was / is the needed clearing house of climate related discussion which was critical of the unsupported hypothesis of harmful and significant warming from fossil fuels.

    Thank you.

    🖖

    John

  91. I just watched Tucker Carlson of Fox News get twisted into knots by the Mayor of Miami. Tucker asked him how he could justifiy going along with the cost of the Paris Agreement, and the mayor proceeded to tell Tucker about sea level rise around Miami and gave that as a reason: To mitigate Miami’s sea level rise.

    The mayor didn’t tell Tucker that the flooding in Miami is not due to the sea level there rising but to other things like the land sinking, and apparently Tucker had no clue about this glaring difference and did not call the mayor on it but let it stand as truth.

    This is invariably a tactic used by liberal mayors who live close to the sea (I saw this same kind of distortion of sea level rise just a couple of months ago), so Tucker ought to study up on this so he can debunk these sea-level rising false stories next time.

  92. Congratulations are in order for Anthony Watts and all the crew and denizens of this amazing marketplace of ideas.

    For he’s a jolly good fellow.
    For he’s a jolly good fellow.
    For he’s a jolly good fellow!
    Which nobody can deny.
    Which nobody can deny.
    Which nobody can deny.
    For he’s a jolly good fellow.
    Which nobody can deny.

  93. Another piece of Barack’s dubious “legacy” sent to the garbage pail where it belongs.

    Donald Trump, your name will live in marble. And Obama’s, in sand!

  94. From something I’ve posted in various places on FaceBook, we should have a copy here too:

    The news media is making a big deal that the only two countries that haven’t adopted the Paris Agreement on reducing CO2 emissions are Nicaragua and Syria. As near as I can figure, this merely means that they didn’t sign the Agreement, they may not have been in Paris anyway.

    Those two countries are not listed at http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9444.php . It does list several countries that have signed the Agreement (the US did), but haven’t Ratified/Accepted/Approved it, the biggest country that hasn’t is the Russian Federation, the smallest is probably Liechtenstein. The page says “147 Parties have ratified of 197 Parties to the Convention.” I haven’t counted to see if that includes Accepted/Approved.

    The US has only “Accepted” it because it was written so President Obama wouldn’t have to get it ratified by the Senate as a treaty.

    China has Ratified it, but that’s totally bogus as they don’t have to implement anything until 2030, so we can continue to move manufacturing work there regardless of changes in US emissions.

    • Politics makes for strange bedfellows! If we have to look like the world’s pariah for awhile, then so be it, but I have a strong hunch that the other signatories with financial commitments to this turkey will be backing out in short order, well-before the end of Trump’s first term is out.

      Go, Team U.S. – Nicaragua – Syria!

  95. I have been reading this blog for many years. This is your finest hour.(Apologies to Winston Churchill). I cannot express my gratitude for what you have wrought. My highest PERSONAL allocate: Thank you Anthony Watts for being YOU.

  96. As I predicted, Trump pulled out of the Paris Accord, but left the door open to renegotiate a new “fairer” deal….

    Although I’m delighted Trump ended this poisonous Paris agreement, there is ZERO logic in renegotiating for LESS poison. Whether you swallow 10 grams of arsenic or 1 gram of it, poison is poison. The key is not to swallow ANY poison, which the farcical CAGW sc@m certainly is.

    In 3~5 years, the disparity between CAGW’s global warming projections will likely exceed reality by well over 3 standard deviations, and global warming trends will be close to 0.00C/decade for the past 25 years, which, scientifically, would mark the end of the biggest and most expensive Leftist sc@m in human history.

    The demise of CAGW likely usher in a “YUUUUGE” loss of Leftists’ credibility and power, as they inextricably tied themselves to this farce.

    And so it goes, until it doesn’t….

    • Germany, France, and Italy have jointly publicly stated they will not renegotiate the Paris accord.

      Win, win!.

      • Reg-san:

        I just wish Trump wouldn’t have even mentioned the possibility of entering a new CO2 sequestration agreement.

        CAGW is a disconfirmed hypothesis. To entertain even the possibility of renegotiating a “fairer” CO2 sequestration agreement implies CAGW is a viable problem that needs to be addressed….

        CAGW is NOT a problem, it doesn’t exist and doesn’t need to be addressed. It’s dead.

        The sooner the world realizes CAGW is a farce, the sooner the world can address real problems like: the global debt crisis, Jihadi terrorism, over regulation, over taxation, illegal immigration, unemployment, the expansion of government tyranny through Socialism, etc…

    • ZERO logic in renegotiating for LESS poison.

      You missed what he did. He made the offer. There is ZERO chance it will be renegotiated (as the old Europe regimes have stated), but by OFFERING to talk, he has squarely put the ball in their court. He does not expect them to, but the burden is on them.

  97. Here’s hoping Trump’s rejection of Paris starts toppling all the warmist dominoes, including (especially) the green-throttled province of Ontario. Our long-term ruling Liberal party drank the Kool-ade over a decade ago and taxpayers are groaning under the yoke of green naivete and stupidity, with the increasing damage only just beginning to hit home. Again, thank-you Anthony for providing a forum for science and truth!

  98. I found this site 10 years ago because something wasn’t making sense about what was then called global warming. I’ve been reading here ever since and also want to thank Anthony Watts for a wonderful site with outstanding contributors and commenters.

    I’m Canadian, and though I couldn’t vote, I was an early Trump supporter. You Americans have someone to be very proud of. God bless Trump and God bless The USA.

    I do hope this does lead to an unravelling of the entire fraud, and quickly, before J. Trudeau can screw things up even more than he’s already planned.

    What a wonderful, historic day.

  99. Thank you, Anthony, for all you have done for more than ten years to make this possible. You deserve to feel very good right now. Oh, and I’m hitting the tip jar.

  100. Finally, a global leader with the “cojones” to say that Paris Accord type policy is a massive waste of money for no measurable good. As someone said: the most expensive and inefficient refrigerator ever proposed. Antony and all moderators, posters at WUWT, and other skeptic voices are due a massive thank you from us all, because you have provided the scientific arguments and the voice of reason on this. Watch other leaders follow suit, once a bit of leadership has been shown. (this from a Scot in Spain – just to further demonstrate the international range of the audience here).

    • Your go to guy for a supporting view is the neocon that helped push the US into the Iraq war. That makes him the poster child of who NOT to listen to.

  101. The news coverage this morning irritates me so much that I need some place to regurgitate this nonsense.

    1) The news seems more concerned with answering the big question — “Does Donald Trump still consider Climate Change to be a hoax perpetuated by the Chinese?” Despite every attempt to distract from this big question by talking about whether the Paris deal was good for America or effective (which, I guess are minor questions), the news anchors needed to get to the bottom of this big question.

    2) The news keeps getting the economics backwards. They pound the table and say that employment in the coal industry peaked right after WWII and now stands at “only 160,000 people”. What they are missing is the number of jobs created due to inexpensive fossil fuels. It’s not about the number of jobs in the coal industry — it is about the value of each job to the economy. If it takes 1,600,000 people in renewable energy fields to create the same amount of energy as 160,000 people in the coal industry, then the value of each job is reduced by a factor of 10.

    3) They pound the table and point to how CEOs, including oil companies, are supporting the Paris deal, ignoring the fact that they blame these same people for funding “deniers”. They also forget that corporations are terrible economists — they care about profits, not economics. The easiest profits are tax breaks.

    4) In the same way, they forget that nations don’t care about our economics. The news only seems to care about whether we are in lockstep with other nations of the world. Other nations only care about exploiting America for either political gains or our economic wealth.

    5) The most irritating part is that the news doesn’t care about their own biases. They have a token representative for Trump so that the rest of the panel can belittle and mock that perspective. Not one person seems interested in the cost of the Paris agreement relative to the merits. It’s not even a question they seem capable of addressing.

  102. I take off my hat to you (Trump-supporting) Americans for voting in this President.

    Congratulations also to Anthony and his team for helping to make possible this historic event. I am beginning to feel that progress in our fight against the repression of the Green Monster is, at long last, making headway.

  103. Anthony: Thank you so much. You have saved America Billions and as a whistleblower: you deserve part of that. I’ve been here from the start, was online when FOIA informed you of the tranche dump of CRU emails. Corrected Steve McIntyre once and was part of a 4-way with yourself, Piers Corbyn (Its the Sun) and Leif (it’s not the Sun). And today — VE Day. Now I know what it’s like to play a tiny part in winning a giant War. But, you are my hero. Thank you !!!!

  104. “New deal” “renegotiate”

    In WW2 here in the US there were a number of posters encouraging people to conserve gas for the war effort, to deal with a real threat. A common phrase on those posters was “Is this trip necessary?”.

    I sure hope any “renegotiation” insist on a concrete answer to “Are these reductions necessary?”.
    And no computer generated “concrete” or wooden nickles allowed.

  105. MIT have released a statement saying Trump misinterpreted their research on the 0.17°C decrease in temps by 2100.

    http://news.mit.edu/2017/mit-issues-statement-research-paris-agreement-0602#.WTG_V5gpjSE.twitter

    They say it’s the net effect of the Paris COP21 pledges over and above Copenhagen pledges. If however, you have no climate pledges/agreement (neither Copenhagen nor Paris additions) the difference between action (all pledges) and no action is 0.6 to 1.1°C. But no agreement at all for the whole world for the entire 21st century is simply right of the table, a complete straw man. It’s useful as a benchmark to see how all pledges are shaping up in comparison with doing nothing, but Trump was simply citing the obvious additional pledges stated for Paris and their effect in 2100. That’s surely the only sensible way to talk about the practicalities of the situation. That’s even the case if the US exits all agreements (though it makes his citing of the MIT 0.17°C a little hollower, I’ll admit- see below).

    If we forget just for a moment about the US withdrawal. On the day they agreed the Paris Agreement in 2015, the possibility of having no agreement in place was surely not even worthy of a passing thought. Copenhagen pledges would have been assumed to continue on past the 2020 expiry. At least in large part. That’s still the case for the 195 remaining countries and so the *additional* Paris Agreement pledges and their effect on SAT reduction in 2100 is all that matters in the numbers game. That means, on the face of it, that Trump correctly cited the 0.2°C (actually 0.17°C) in the correct context of the additional Paris pledges. The 0.17°C was in the MIT October 2015 Outlook publication.

    Where Trump may come a little unstuck on this is if he is genuinely happy for the US to scrap both the additional Paris pledges *and* abandon Copenhagen commitments when they expire in 2020. i.e. the US would really have no climate agreement. In this case, the correct citing of the 0.2°C reduction by 2100 would still apply for the rest of the world because, as stated above, the rest of the world never had any intention of scrapping the Copenhagen level of commitments. So only the Paris additions are at issue and by extension only the 0.2°C reduction is at issue (not the 0.6 to 1.1°C).

    However, there would be a small adjustment to the 0.2°C if the US pulled out and it’s also a bit off to be referring to the rest-of-world pledges over and above Copenhagen whilst saying you’re going to abandon all pledges. Despite this, the 0.2°C citation would even then still be almost completely true.

    If Trump is thinking of maintaining the Copenhagen pledge levels then his citation of the 0.2°C is entirely correct. However, I believe the Clean Coal plan was a large part of the Copenhagen pledges and he’s scrapping them.

    MIT is already dancing on a pin head as things stand. If Trump is maintaining the Copenhagen pledges but abandoning Paris pledges then the whole world is sticking to Copenhagen and additional Paris pledges are the only issue. If that’s the case, 0.2°C is the only issue, not MIT’s 0.6 to 1.1°C, and therefore Trump *did* cite the 0.2°C correctly.

    Those bigger reductions are compared with *no agreement at all for the entire globe*- a complete straw man. That’s why MIT are dancing on a pin head. They should be knocked off but it would be somewhat easier if we knew how much of Copenhagen pledges are being kept by the US.

Comments are closed.